To preface, this is not a rant or a self indulgent pity fest. This question has been on my mind for a long, long time. The question is, does a doctorate (or any institutionally conferred degree or licensure) mean anything?
The short answer is no. The longer answer is that it depends on what you think that piece of paper actually represents. The basic reality of any degree or license or whatever is that people who already hold that title generally agree that you should have that title as well. It does not mean that you are smart, or exceptional, or better than anyone. It simply means that you are considered equal without needing to reprove your prior accomplishments. That assumption may be completely wrong, but the degree nevertheless confers the benefit of that assumption.
In my particular case, i do not have a PhD because 1) i ran out of money to pay a group of people to read my book, and 2) i stopped caring. There were many strange events that led to that situation, including my dissertation advisor telling me that i should be at a much more identifiably prestigious university, several committee members actually quitting their positions, and the loss of an adjunct position at the worst possible time in the academic calendar (4 months after applications for teaching positions are generally due). Again i stress, that is not the point of this essay. I summarize merely to point out that no one told me "you don't deserve a doctorate" or kicked me out or acted strange toward me in any way. Or, maybe they did and i didn't notice. Again, not really that important.
So, does my letting the time limit of completing a doctorate lapse erase that doctorate level education? The answer is definitely not. To any person at any company who looks at my resume, i have a PhD and am overqualified for any position to which i apply. From my perspective, that comes across as "you could be my boss's boss and i'm afraid to hire you."
Assuming i don't lie, i have to tell people that i have a masters degree and completed doctoral course work. If you called the university of north texas, they would truthfully tell you that i was ABD (all but dissertation) when i stopped enrolling.
This would seem to be a paradox. One world (academia) defines me as ineligible to hold a university level position, while another world (private commercial business) views my high level education as a liability. Financially i am both uncreditworthy (from sustained unemployment) and unpromotable (because any attempt at corporate advancement reopens the debate about my qualifications vs. the qualifications of the person reviewing my qualifications).
I am a trained theorist. The subject matter i am analyzing is of comparatively little importance. It is my reasoned opinion that most people do not feel comfortable in the presence of a person skilled in analyzing a situation and suggesting the positive AND negative effects of a particular action. That is frustrating for me because i simply do not care about the assignation of blame for any particular failure, be it human, mechanical, or systematic. My only concern is correcting a problem after it has already happened, and changing procedure is often the simplest solution; a procedure with more personal responsibility and fewer points of failure.
Yet, because i have no interest in gaining power or control, the natural inclination is to argue about the validity of my suggestions; an even more counterproductive course of action that leads to my having to point out my lack of sympathy.
Is it true that any attempt to remain objective is more harmful than manipulatively or arbitrarily choosing one side of an argument? I don't know. That question is beyond the scope of my intellect, however high or low you evaluate it.
Altogether, this would imply that a degree (etc.) is only as meaningful as one's willingness to capitalize on that title at the expense of others. To elevate the prestige of a title one must persecute or subjugate anyone not holding that same title.
However, such a historically conservative view of the relationship between intelligence and power is clearly inconsistent to my previous explanation of my own situation. To the world at large, i have a PhD, and no amount of explaining that i do not will ever remedy that situation. Collectively, you think that piece of paper is completely unimportant, but you demand that i act like i possess it even though i don't. You want the assurance of leadership in the face of anarchy, but i hand you more anarchy.
Every man, woman, or child is a universe unto themselves. That does not frighten me, or confuse me. What confuses me is the desperate need to be lied to that i see every day. The need for a proverbial adult to keep you going, to assure you that there is any order to the coincidence of existence. Someone to make up rules that you can choose to live by or ignore, as though you are incapable of making a decision based on your experience of the world around you.
That took an esoteric turn, didn't it? My point is simply that when you look for meaning where there is no meaning, you will find an infinite array of coincidences. We are all making it up as we go, and we are tragically unwilling to let any of it fall to the ground, even when it gets too heavy to carry.
Cheers?
